At Annapolis, not so much who is admitted, but who is hired

By CDR Salamander | Substack

This took place in the Biden Administration. With the discussions about what is going on with faculty at West Point the last week, I figured this is as good a time as any to show how the institution’s actions in hiring faculty align more with building a system of political indoctrination than education.

This system feels more like the humanities department at Oberlin or Brown than a military service academy training the next generation of officers to fight our wars and secure our peace.

I don’t think much more commentary on my part is required here. The evidence below damns itself. It is partial, but it is from an impeccable source.

It raises the question: is this still going on?

Incredibly ironic from a service academy history department—a service academy that spent over four decades primarily focused on defeating the drive towards a global communist order—that they should create what is, red in tooth and claw, a political officer for the selection of faculty.

Just in the last few years, they put Zampolit down to the Company level, and even on faculty selection committees.

Absolutely amazing.

Guidance on Diversity Search Advocates (DSAs) in History Department Searches

ADOPTED 5-5-2021 (Unanimously)

1. Diversity Search Advocates (DSA) should have fuller training. The present PowerPoint and presentation by an expert are good but vague.

2. Diversity Search Advocates should continue to learn about the position and the experiences of fellow USNA DSAs and those at other colleges.

Diversity Search Advocates are included on all hiring searches to ensure that hiring processes are fair and can help departments identify candidates who will leverage their lived experiences to their role as teachers and scholars at the Academy. The Diversity Search Advocate’s primary responsibility is to engage the committee in conversations about processes to ensure implicit biases are not impeding them from fairly evaluating all potential candidates. If possible, the Department should identify and select among the available trained DSAs.

1. 1. DSA should be a full member of the committee. While not casting a vote on hire, the DSA should nonetheless be afforded all the same courtesies and considerations that the search committee enjoy and extend to each other. The DSA should be invited to all meetings and allowed to contribute ideas and observations including the development of the job description and the Department’s stated hiring priorities in disciplinary content.
   2. The Department Chair should schedule a meeting with the Chair of the Hiring Committee to meet with the Diversity Search Advocate to discuss expectations, role, responsibilities, and past experiences as DSA.
   3. DSA should be a member of the search committee from the time of its forming (not added to an existing committee, especially if it has met without the DSA before they joined).
   4. DSA should attend the organizational meeting during which the department chair, search committee chair, and provosts meet to discuss the parameters of the search.
   5. Department search committee members should be familiar with the role of the DSA. (Perhaps they should also review the PowerPoint presentation.) They should be familiar with the DSA’s role as advocate, rather than as a referee or federal hiring practices specialist.
   6. DSA should have input on spreadsheets or other data amalgamation sites under a category such as, “Does the candidate bring diversity to USNA”? All committee members should contribute feedback to this column.
   7. During video and on-campus interviews, the DSA should be able to pose questions to candidates on topics concerning diversity, bias, and inclusion. Alternatively, the DSA should be allowed to formulate questions about diversity, bias, and inclusion that will be posed directly to the candidates. Committees send a powerful message about diversity when they refuse to allow DSA engage with candidates.
   8. DSA should convene a wrap-up meeting to talk with the committee about the search.

How many years was this going on?

If you want to change USNA, find out who staffed, approved, encouraged, and executed this.

Then find out who was hired under this system.

There is a paper record. More is there.

First published on CDR Salamander’s Substack

–

One of the comments:

“CDR Sal, continued gratitude towards those who like you who have been shining sunlight on this anti-American indoctrination for, well, a long time.

And doing so at personal reputation risk as pointing this garbage out evoked a vigorous response against you.

Now for the hard part: When you roll over a rock, you better be prepared to deal with what you find beneath it.

The immediate obvious cottonmouth lunging at you is easy to see.

The offspring who have moved into the system and who have been spreading the “gospel of DEI and CRT” for decades are still influencing the system from top to bottom.

Creating a new “incentive structure” that no longer rewards supporting that “gospel” is a difficult and essential step in restoring lethal competence to the USN and DoD in general.

THAT task is going to be very difficult and will take years. To think otherwise is…foolish.

Fingers crossed that SECDEF truly understands the rock he has rolled over.”